The world is witnessing an increase in cross-border data transfers and breaches orchestrated by State and non-State actors. Cross-border data transfers may lead to friction among States to localize or globalize data and to provide regulatory frameworks. “Data warfare” or information-war operations are often not covered under conventional rules; however, they are categorized as acts of espionage and subject to domestic regulations. As such, the operations are used to achieve a variety of objectives, including stealing sensitive information, spreading propaganda, and causing economic damage. Notable instances of the theft of sensitive information include the recent Bangladesh government website breach, exposing 50 million records, and the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI) website hack.

Regulating the “data war” under the existing principles of international law may be unsuccessful in creating robust international legal frameworks to address the associated challenges. These developments further accentuate the global divide between data-rich regions in the Global North, with strong data protection mechanisms (such as the GDPR and the California Privacy Rights Act), and regions in the Global South, where there is a lack of comprehensive data protection laws and regulatory regimes. This disparity underscores the urgent need for global cooperation for substantial international regulatory mechanisms.

This article examines the complexities surrounding data warfare; it highlights the imperative need for establishing a robust global legal framework for data protection, delving into the concept of data war. It also acknowledges the growing influence of advanced technologies like data computing and mining and their ongoing threats to the fundamental rights of individuals associated with exposed personal data. The authors address the deficiencies in international legal provisions and advocate for a global regulatory approach to data protection as a critical means of safeguarding personal freedoms and countering the escalating threats in the digital age.

The annual conference of the American Library Association (ALA) was held June 27–July 2, 2024, in San Diego, California. This year's opening session, which began the afternoon of June 28, 2024, featured an introduction by current ALA President, Emily Drabinski. She reviewed the progress of the association and commented on the number of international participants attending this year's conference. She noted that there were 340 participants from 51 different countries represented at the meeting.

Librarianship is a profession guided by ethical principles that prioritize access to information and the protection of intellectual freedom. These principles can provide a framework for understanding how society should respond to legal judgments, particularly those that result in societal division. One such example is the 1973 landmark judgment in the United States, Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortion. Despite multiple attempts to repeal it, a successful attempt in 2022 resulted in another landmark decision to overturn the ruling, prompting a political outcry from the Left.

However, it is crucial for all parties involved to adhere to ethical standards in responding to such divisive issues. This paper argues that librarianship can serve as a model for navigating divisive legal judgments. If society can adopt principles such as access to information and protection of intellectual freedom, it can move towards a more inclusive and respectful discourse. The adoption of these principles can enable all parties, including judges, citizens, and lawmakers, to better respond to divisive legal judgments. Librarianship emphasizes the importance of respectful and informed discourse, and its ethical principles can be used as a guide for creating an atmosphere of mutual respect and understanding.

In the past decade, the provision of open access to legal information has experienced unprecedented improvement. One of the recent additions to the open-access regime is the introduction of Legal Information Institutes (LIIs) that provide access to important information contained in government gazettes, reports, judicial decisions, and statutory instruments. As important as LIIs are for enhancing legal research, a perusal of the relevant literature reveals that there is generally a dearth about LIIs.

Against this background, this article examines the LIIs’ contribution to legal information to determine how to strengthen LIIs in terms of their content and viability.

The global healthcare landscape faces mounting challenges, from resource constraints and rural healthcare access in Uzbekistan, to aging populations and rising chronic disease rates in Europe. Amidst these, the digital transformation in healthcare and the study of international legal aspects governing telemedicine services have emerged as crucial priorities. This article examines the international legal framework for telemedicine, analyzing key documents of the United Nations (UN), World Health Organization (WHO), International Telecommunication Union (ITU), and various regional bodies. It highlights the absence of a universal agreement that comprehensively addresses telemedicine regulation and data protection issues. The article explores national regulatory efforts and identifies gaps in the current fragmented approach. Recommendations include establishing a dedicated subsidiary body under the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) to oversee telemedicine-related matters and codifying scattered norms into a coherent framework. Strengthening the international legal basis for telemedicine can help expand access to vital healthcare services and improve global health outcomes.

The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) and its seamless integration with today's defense technologies and equipment raise concerns about how this may impact the application of international legal norms related to the direct and public incitement of genocide. This work elaborates on the potential difficulties resulting from the rise of AI vis-à-vis the enforcement of the Rome Statute, specifically focusing on Article 25(3)(e) and interconnected soft law instruments such as the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD) and the Genocide Convention. The work concentrates on how the Rome Statute, which was designed during (and catered to) a pre-digital era, falls short in addressing the complex challenges posed by AI-driven portals. These types of portals can be utilized to plan and amplify calls for genocide in a manner that is not fully protected by the existing legal framework.

By looking at case law and engaging in theoretical and speculative analysis, this work delves into the various ways in which AI and virtual private networks (VPNs) can influence the dissemination of genocidal speech—specifically, by prioritizing user engagement over truthfulness or accuracy, necessitating a relook at what constitutes “direct and public incitement” under international law. The work also raises the question of attribution and how the atrocities committed due to such incitements might be prosecuted. Lastly, the work focuses on proposed amendments to the Rome Statute that could answer these new legal challenges while safeguarding freedom of expression.